Some months ago, I read a book about logic, based on the
teachings of Socrates.Dr. Peter Kreeft
(philosophy professor at BostonCollege) reviews the
teachings of the ancient Greek logician, and, of course, encourages
contemporary readers to think clearly and coherently.In particular, Kreeft points out several fallacies
that mar sound logical reasoning.One of
these fallacies, the ad hominem argument,
appears on I Thessalonians Two.

Paul’s enemies employed this kind of false reasoning to
discredit the apostle’s message.Their
argument must have run something like this.Paul, they asserted, was a charlatan who, motivated by greed, took
advantage of the Thessalonian believers.Therefore, his message could not be true because Paul had serious flaws
in his character and motives.In other
words, they attacked Paul’s character to discredit his message.The ad
hominem approach attacks the person instead of answering the argument, and,
unable to refute Paul’s sound reasoning from the Old Testament (concerning the
identity of Jesus), these Jewish leaders resorted to
assailing Paul’s integrity.

Paul enjoyed the benefits of a thorough education.We know that he attended rabbinical school,
but it seems clear that he also acquainted himself with Greek philosophy and
poetry (he knew, for instance, the philosophical views of the Stoics and
Epicureans and was familiar with Cretan poetry).The apostle knew that the Jewish leaders had reasoned
poorly; yet, he answered their criticism.

A very wise pastor once warned me about the danger of
self-defense; in fact, this dear man gently instructed me to never defend
myself.Instead, he reasoned, I should
let the Lord be my defense.While I see
the wisdom of this man’s counsel, apparently there are times when God’s people
should offer a defense to meet personal attacks.Paul certainly thought it appropriate to
offer this justification for his behavior in Thessalonica.As I see it, Paul answered this assault
because he believed the integrity of the gospel was at stake.He understood the vulnerability of preachers
to personal attacks, but his primary concern centered on the integrity of his
message.

The chapter makes two appeals. First, Paul expressed his
confidence in the fairness and integrity of the Thessalonians.He knew these fine people would remember his
conduct among them and make sound, reliable judgments about his character and
work.Second, none of these accusations
stood up under careful, fair scrutiny.Paul was confident that his track record would speak for itself.

Lesson Outline:

I.Paul’s Defense of his Character and Work (vv. 1-12)

A.Paul’s
suffering for the sake of the gospel (vv. 1-2): Prior to visiting Thessalonica,
Paul spent some time in Philippi, a city where
he and Silas suffered greatly (See Acts 16).In addition to imprisonment, the two missionaries were scourged; yet,
such shameful mistreatment had not hindered Paul from bravely preaching the
gospel in Macedonia.When the missionary band came to
Thessalonica, the opposition to the gospel continued, and the new converts
witnessed, first hand, the determination of the preachers to spread the message
of Christ despite intimidating opposition.

B.Six
disclaimers concerning Paul’s preaching (vv. 3-6): The Jewish leaders made
serious charges against the apostle, and it is not hard to identify their
erroneous claims.Without specifically
stating the accusations, Paul defended himself on six fronts.

1.“not
of deceit or uncleanness”: The word translated “deceit” means “error.”Paul defended himself against the error of
sensuality.Apparently, his detractors
accused him of sexual misconduct (sadly, a common occurrence among false
teachers).

2.“Nor
was it made with guile”: The word “guile” was commonly used to describe the
bait used by fishermen.Enemies of the
gospel accused Paul of using his considerable persuasive skills to lure the
Thessalonians into a false religion.

3.“not
to please men, but to please God”: The apostle’s only aim focused on serving
God.Leon Morris, in his excellent
little commentary, observes that Christian preachers often succumb to the
temptation to accommodate (compromise) their message to the desires of their
hearers.Paul claimed he did not preach
an accommodating gospel in Thessalonica.

4.“we
never used words of flattery”: “Flattery” translates a word that denotes fair
words used to lull someone into a false sense of security.Once flattery has done its work, it renders
its victim incapable of discernment and vulnerable to attack.

5.“nor
as a cloak of greed”: In this context, “cloak” denotes a medium of
concealment.Paul’s opponents had
apparently claimed that the apostle used the gospel as a ruse to take financial
advantage of his hearers.This
accusation clearly stung the apostle.He
reminded his readers of his work in Thessalonica.The text implies that Paul worked at his
trade (tent making) so that he might not burden the infant church (vv 9-12).This claim, it seems, has particular
application to some segments of American evangelicalism.While most hard working ministers do not cash
in on the gospel, disturbing trends have surfaced in recent years.In particular, I have concerns about the
“health and wealth” preachers and some of the mega churches. In many cases, I
fear that these segments of the evangelical world have become monuments to
American greed, consumerism, and selfishness. Paul’s example stands as a
damning indictment to such unworthy conceit. Paul’s motives, in contrast to
greed, arose from the heart of a nurse caring for an infant, loving and
gentle.Moreover, the apostle
underscored his point by observing this important principle of ministry, “… but
also our own selves’ (v. 8).Pastoral
ministry involves deep, costly love, love so deep that it requires a pouring
out of the man’s soul (Greek word “psyche”).

6.“we
did not seek glory from men”: In a sense, this is a restatement of Paul’s
concern expressed in point three.

II.Paul’s Thanksgiving for the Faithfulness of the
Thessalonians (vv. 13-16)

A.Paul
thanked God for the openness of the Thessalonians (v. 13): The apostle had
preached the gospel, and the Thessalonian believers received the message as the
word of God.Paul used two different
words to describe their receptivity.The
first denotes receiving a message as one would accept news from a friend or
acquaintance.The second word reflects a
slightly different meaning, to welcome the gospel as one would embrace a
long-awaited guest in the home.Not only
did these believers embrace the gospel, but the message of Christ continued to
transform their lives.

B.Paul
thanked God that the church in Thessalonica followed (imitated) the example of
the believers in Jerusalem (vv. 14-16): Like the
church in Jerusalem,
the Thessalonians had experienced hostile opposition to their faith in
Christ.In both cases (Jerusalem and Thessalonica), Paul observed,
Jewish religious leaders had spearheaded the persecution, and their actions had
provoked the wrath of God.This
opposition had a long, tragic history that included hostility toward the Old
Testament prophets and the Lord Jesus himself.

III.Paul’s Desire to See the Thessalonians (vv. 17-20)

A.Paul’s
absence from Thessalonica (v. 17): As highlighted in last week’s lesson, Paul
had left Thessalonica several months before he wrote this epistle; therefore,
he had not seen his friends in quite some time.He expressed his feelings in very strong words (literally- “since we
were orphaned of you”).While in Berea, Paul had apparently
sent Timothy to check on the Thessalonians, but this contact did not satisfy
the apostle’s desire to enjoy fellowship with his brothers and sisters.

B.Satan’s
opposition to Paul’s work (v. 18): Clearly, Paul believed in a malevolent being
that controls the world’s sinful desires and actions.This belief may seem superstitious or naïve
to modern people, but the textual evidence is unmistakable as to Paul’s
convictions.He thought that Satan had
prevented the apostle’s return to Thessalonica.

C.Paul’s
treasure and reward (vv. 19-20): The apostle concluded this section with a
tender, moving assessment of his investment in the Thessalonians.He had little to show, as the world might
see, for his life of self-sacrifice.It
appears that he had little more than the clothes on his back and perhaps a few
earthly possessions.What legacy might
such a man leave?His legacy centered on
the people to whom he had ministered.Paul
used three images to express his confidence in these folks. They were his hope,
joy, and crown.